[shhrubbery!]

I'm as conservative as it gets. But I also know that wetlands regulations are not always as senseless and silly as some conservatives try to make it seem.

In New Jersey we have major, major problems with flooding that is caused by overdevelopment and filling in of wetlands.

Local corruption --i.e. land developers in bed with local pols and planning boards-- is what got us into this terrible situation. Land that should never have been developed, because of the threat development posed to existing neighborhoods, got paved over and covered with McMansionvilles and strip malls.

Sometimes the only weapon we have against this (I say "we" because I am anti-corruption local official) is the EPA or the state DEP.

I don't claim to know exactly what is going on in this case in Idaho, but I remember from previous articles that this couple illegally filled in the lot. We see that kind of behavior in NJ all the time. I am not sympathetic.

What if you had a existing house next door, that all of a sudden began to flood because of this couple's flouting the rules?

[aruanan]

What if you had a existing house next door, that all of a sudden began to flood because of this couple's flouting the rules?

You suffer damages due to someone else's action and you sue for relief. That's exactly what civil court is for.

[okie01]

I don't claim to know exactly what is going on in this case in Idaho, but I remember from previous articles that this couple illegally filled in the lot. We see that kind of behavior in NJ all the time. I am not sympathetic.

Have you seen a photograph of the property in question?

It is a lot that is indistinguishable from the lots on all sides of it. If you had, you would be sympathetic.